The Hawaiian gazette., 1887-08-16

st was now well established tnat
faithful and fair reports, even II inal-
vidual character did suffer thereby,
were privileged, and the publisher
was neither civilly nor criminally re
snonsible." Counsel further on SAID,
"ff there was no intention to preJu-
dice. but merely fair statement, he
failed to see where the contempt came
in even in the case of private lndl-
yidual. The opposite counsel had ar
gued that q party is entitled to pro
lection against the publication OF
charges against him. If that primer
ple we're followed out to its logical
conclusion it would prevent the pub
LEGATION of evidence in the course OF a
trial" These views are exactly in &C
cord with the decision of the Queens
Bench Division herein cited.
According to the decision of the Ha
waiian Supreme Court, the local news
papers are committing contempt OF
court every day, in their recording OF
Judicial proceedings in different
courts, while in various stages of pro
gress. This is a position that, on re-
Election, it is to be hoped their Honors
will see their way clear to abandon.
As the committal of Mr. Creighton
for contempt was not based on any
statute, but entirely on the decisions
of foreign courts, the Court would be
doing no more than justice to recon
slider its opinion, unless they hold the
authorities they cited to be more
worthy of respect than the English
High Court of Justice Indeed, our
Supreme Court, in its own opinion,
conceded the point that the publica-
ton in question was not calculated to
prejudice the mind of the Court try
ing the pending case. 1t is prejudice
in the public mind that the Justices
seek to guard against, but here we
have the most eminent authority
known for the position that such a
publication as that made by respond
ent, is ''great public service"
An able and venerable Judge, pre-
siding over the trial of libel suit,
brought against a correspondent of a
paper published by the present writer.
affirmed the principle that a
journalist was performing his highest
duty when he exposed public wrongs,
taking on himself the responsibility
for whatever injury might thereby be
inflicted upon individuals. The case,
too, was somewhat analogous to the
recent contempt case here, for the
alleged libel consisted in charging a
sutton in court with perjury and with
with the grand jury, he be-
ing the officer of court having the
grand jurors in keeping, while they
we're deciding on an Indictment charg-
ing him with perjury and fraud. The
libel was pretty thoroughly justified,
but a tender-hearted jury gave the
plaintiff one dollar damages, thus
saving him from the peni-
lentiary. The judge did not look
lpon the publication in the light of
although it made grave
charges against an individual at once
1 sutton and an officer in the court;
put left the whole question of priv
eye to depend upon the issue of the
Plea of justification set up by the de,
lons.
We have called the attention of our
eaders, and more especially of the
egal fraternity, to this recent decision
n England, in order that the full re-
'ort of the case may be obtained. if
-esired, to ascertain what may be the
rounds on which it is based, and the
ule established in cases of contempt.
which presidents form the only
'uide.